NationalHSFB.com Preseason Top 25 Rankings

[1Since71]

2 hours ago, Longtime Observer said:

I'm not alleging that there is a conspiracy involved. I'm stating what should be obvious: human bias (that of one human in this case) shapes how the ratings turn out through how the model is programmed. So do the inherent limitations in trying to evaluate teams who never play each other, never play any common opponents, or even any common opponents of opponents.  There are states-primarily CA but I've noticed TX and Ohio in year's past- whose teams are given more of a boost than teams in other states. And that determination is made primarily on subjective terms.

I'm not saying I could do any better. But, I'm also not telling states they should use my ratings to seed teams for state playoffs, either.

I don’t how they use Calpreps in Florida but in California they don’t tell anyone who should be in the playoffs they just rate the teams and the Sections that use their service determine what division each rated team belongs.

i would agree on a national scale it really doesn’t work that well but on regions,divisions and sections it’s pretty good 

[GardenStateBaller]

19 minutes ago, 1Since71 said:

I don’t how they use Calpreps in Florida but in California they don’t tell anyone who should be in the playoffs they just rate the teams and the Sections that use their service determine what division each rated team belongs.

i would agree on a national scale it really doesn’t work that well but on regions,divisions and sections it’s pretty good 

CP won me over after almost exactly predicting the final score of the MD/DV game. 

[1Since71]

1 hour ago, GardenStateBaller said:

CP won me over after almost exactly predicting the final score of the MD/DV game. 

Which was crazy that early in the season 

[Longtime Observer]

2 hours ago, 1Since71 said:

I don’t how they use Calpreps in Florida but in California they don’t tell anyone who should be in the playoffs they just rate the teams and the Sections that use their service determine what division each rated team belongs.

i would agree on a national scale it really doesn’t work that well but on regions,divisions and sections it’s pretty good 

It's still a crapshoot regionally. BUT, as long as teams in some states are rated higher than teams in other states (despite an absence of real evidence supporting such a claim), and there are (relatively few) OOS games, than having fewer degrees of separation between your school and schools in the preferred states will impact ALL of the ratings. Venice (Fl) starts this season with a power rating of 63.3, higher than most everyone in the state, because of its "connectivity" to CA powers. In recent seasons, they've played IMG, SFA, STA and Columbus. Those teams, either through their schedules or the schedules of their opponents in recent years, greatly reduce the number of links in the chain between them and the CA schools. So, for 2022, they lost a lot of key players, only list a couple of players with recruiting stars, and were beaten decisively in the spring game (which was played for real, and is viewable on NFHS site), but still get a very good starting rating. Teams that play Venice now get points for facing a team rated in the 60s, which gives themselves a chance to boost their rating, which boosts their other opponents ratings, and so on. Those teams, with boosted ratings due to a game against a team in the 60s, now also boost Venice right back, since Venice has teams now rated more highly on its schedule.

The "connectivity" to preferred states' top teams is how we end up with a 6-5 team (all 5 losses were by a minimum of three (3) TDs) with no impressive wins starting the season rated #11 in the COUNTRY (Santa Margarita). It's how another team no one has ever heard of can go 3-7, with zero wins over top 2000 teams, and zero rated prospects to spotlight, can end up rated #317 (waayyy above average) NATIONALLY ( San juan Hills). Both of those schools (and plenty of others) have very few links in their schedule chain between themselves and the elite CA teams. 

 

[Longtime Observer]

2 hours ago, GardenStateBaller said:

CP won me over after almost exactly predicting the final score of the MD/DV game. 

using that "reasoning", every time one points out predictions that turned out wildly wrong, you'd be influenced in the other direction. Of course, calpreps offers a valuable service for you, so you'll ignore all such examples.

[Longtime Observer]

1 hour ago, 1Since71 said:

Which was crazy that early in the season 

Not when you consider that CA, as a default, is rated so much higher than other states by calpreps. And, of course, now the anecdote will be used as irrefutable proof that the assumptions built into the model are right.  

[1Since71]

36 minutes ago, Longtime Observer said:

Not when you consider that CA, as a default, is rated so much higher than other states by calpreps. And, of course, now the anecdote will be used as irrefutable proof that the assumptions built into the model are right.  

Calpreps projections on winners was 83.3% in more than 32,000 games.I’d say the model is just fine

[1Since71]

40 minutes ago, Longtime Observer said:

Not when you consider that CA, as a default, is rated so much higher than other states by calpreps. And, of course, now the anecdote will be used as irrefutable proof that the assumptions built into the model are right.  

In over 1500 Florida games the model was 84.5% correct on winners 

[Longtime Observer]

54 minutes ago, 1Since71 said:

In over 1500 Florida games the model was 84.5% correct on winners 

Ned, this doesn't say anything as to the accuracy of the ratings of teams that never play, have no common opponents, and no common opponents of opponents.  

[Steeler01]

5 hours ago, 1Since71 said:

I don’t how they use Calpreps in Florida but in California they don’t tell anyone who should be in the playoffs they just rate the teams and the Sections that use their service determine what division each rated team belongs.

i would agree on a national scale it really doesn’t work that well but on regions,divisions and sections it’s pretty good 

It works pretty well in states where teams play each other from different areas or divisions. In Southern Cali with the way teams are broken up into divisions by calpreps for postseason play, there will be teams that get ranked higher because of the postseason boost given that shouldn't be rated as high.  Serra was a perfect example last season.  They played in division 3 in the section, but ended up in the top 15 for the state in calpreps final ranking. 

[GardenStateBaller]

1 hour ago, Longtime Observer said:

Ned, this doesn't say anything as to the accuracy of the ratings of teams that never play, have no common opponents, and no common opponents of opponents.  

LOL now Mr. Conspiracy Theorist thinks Ned posts on this site. That being said, I'll try to get him on for a Q&A in the near future so he can educate us on his fine product. 

[1Since71]

2 hours ago, Longtime Observer said:

Ned, this doesn't say anything as to the accuracy of the ratings of teams that never play, have no common opponents, and no common opponents of opponents.  

Good 😂 

You could have six degrees of separation and have some form of connection.Obviously the further away the less accurate.Somehow his model still predicts how teams will do at an 83.3% nationally 

[Columbiafan]

3 hours ago, 1Since71 said:

In over 1500 Florida games the model was 84.5% correct on winners 

Doesn't mean the preseason rankings are accurate

 

Computer rankings always tend to correct itself over the course of a season with more data 

 

The problem is what data are they using for preseason?!!

[1Since71]

1 hour ago, Steeler01 said:

It works pretty well in states where teams play each other from different areas or divisions. In Southern Cali with the way teams are broken up into divisions by calpreps for postseason play, there will be teams that get ranked higher because of the postseason boost given that shouldn't be rated as high.  Serra was a perfect example last season.  They played in division 3 in the section, but ended up in the top 15 for the state in calpreps final ranking. 

He needs to get rid of the playoff boost.It skews wildly 

[Columbiafan]

1 minute ago, 1Since71 said:

Good 😂 

You could have six degrees of separation and have some form of connection.Obviously the further away the less accurate.Somehow his model still predicts how teams will do at an 83.3% nationally 

And I picked 8/8 state champs last year

 

It doesn't take a math expert to figure out that percentage 😂

[1Since71]

4 minutes ago, Columbiafan said:

And I picked 8/8 state champs last year

 

It doesn't take a math expert to figure out that percentage 😂

That was over 32,000 games 

give it a go 😂

Edited July 14, 2022 by 1Since71

[1Since71]

4 minutes ago, Columbiafan said:

Doesn't mean the preseason rankings are accurate

 

Computer rankings always tend to correct itself over the course of a season with more data 

 

The problem is what data are they using for preseason?!!

http://calpreps.com/cgi-bin/2007/ratings_fixes3.pl

[Columbiafan]

1 minute ago, 1Since71 said:

That was over 32,000 games 

give it a go 😂

Well technically all someone has to do is pick 8 teams correctly at the beginning and therefore pick 8 state championships as a result 

 

3 minutes ago, 1Since71 said:

http://calpreps.com/cgi-bin/2007/ratings_fixes3.pl

The biggest issue I see is in a state with heavy transfer movement unless someone reports the roster change the initial start point will be way off and it's hard to get to the top of the rankings when starting low unless you beat a bunch of higher ranked teams but those higher ranked teams may not actually be better because of inaccurate data points 

[GardenStateBaller]

14 minutes ago, Columbiafan said:

And I picked 8/8 state champs last year

 

It doesn't take a math expert to figure out that percentage 😂

You got lucky. This season you won't even go .500. 

[Columbiafan]

Just now, GardenStateBaller said:

You got lucky. This season you won't even go .500. 

Not lucky, most weren't hard to pick but I wasn't fooled by MNW name into ranking them over a Jesuit team who was due 

[Columbiafan]

People have to realize while some teams are good teams just their name doesn't make them the favorite and MNW was living off their name last year and nothing is changing this year 

[GardenStateBaller]

Just now, Columbiafan said:

Not lucky, most weren't hard to pick but I wasn't fooled by MNW name into ranking them over a Jesuit team who was due 

Lost so much respect for MNW last season after they bailed on STA at the last minute for no apparent reason.  

[Columbiafan]

2 minutes ago, GardenStateBaller said:

Lost so much respect for MNW last season after they bailed on STA at the last minute for no apparent reason.  

The reason was probably they didn't get the transfers in they needed to compete 

 

STA would have beat them worse than Venice did in the KOC

[GardenStateBaller]

13 minutes ago, Columbiafan said:

The reason was probably they didn't get the transfers in they needed to compete 

 

STA would have beat them worse than Venice did in the KOC

Then don't schedule the game in the first place. 

[Columbiafan]

3 minutes ago, GardenStateBaller said:

Then don't schedule the game in the first place. 

I agree

 

I would rather see Central vs STA II